Electoral Rules, Political Representation and Advocacy Coalition Framework in Turkey

Abstract

The aim of this research is to understand the impact of the electoral rules on the minority representation in culturally divided societies. The article tries to explore whether the Advocacy Coalition Framework might promote the political participation in decision making process in a restricted party competition. Using data from the Supreme Election Council of Turkey, analyses on elections in Mardin case reveal that issue-based coalitions can lead voters to reflect their ethnic and religious belongings more accurately.

Keywords

• Turkey,electoral rules,local elections,minority representation,Advocacy Coalition Framework

Öz

Bu araştırmanın amacı kültürel olarak kırılmaları olan ülkelerde seçim kurallarının azınlıklarin siyasal temsiline etkisini anlamaktır.  Bu makale Destek Koalisyonu Çerçevesi’nin (DKÇ) siyasi partilerin rekabetçi ortamında karar alma sürecinde siyasi katılımı teşvik etmeye yeterli olup olmadığını ortaya çıkarmayı hedeflemektedir. Türkiye Yüksek Seçim Kurulu’nun (YSK) verilerine dayanarak, Mardin örneğinde kısıtlı olarak bulgulanan koalisyonun, seçmenlerin dini ve etnik aidiyetlerini daha isabetli yansıtmalarını sağlayıp sağlayamadığını analiz eder.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Türkiye,seçim kuralları,yerel seçimler,azınlılarin temsili,Dava Koalisyonu Çerçevesi

References

1. Bacık, G. (2008). The parliamentary elections in Turkey, July 2007. Electoral Studies, 27(2), 356–390.
2. Bochsler, D. (2007). Electoral rules and the representation of ethnic minorities in post-communist democracies. European Yearbook of Minority Issues, 7(2007/8), 153–180.
3. Bogaards, M., Basedau, M., & Hartmann, C. (2010). Ethnic party bans in Africa: an introduction. Democratization, 17(4), 599–617.
4. Ciddi, S. (2009). Kemalism in Turkish politics: the Republican People’s Party, secularism and nationalism. New York: Routledge.
5. Constitution of the Republic of Turkey. (1982). Retrieved March 27, 2016, from https://global.tbmm.gov.tr/docs/constitution_en.pdf
6. Cop, B. (2016). The June 2015 legislative election in Turkey. Electoral Studies, 41, 213–224.
7. Everi, N. (2012). Mardin: güneş ülkesi. İstanbul: Everest Yayınları.
8. Hollerweger, H., Palmer, A., Brock, S. P., & Gülçur, S. (1999). Turabdin: lebendiges Kulturerbe : wo die Sprache Jesu gesprochen wird. Linz, Österreich: Freunde des Tur Abdin.

9. Horowitz, D. L. (2000). Ethnic groups in conflict. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
10. Horowitz, D. L. (2003). Electoral systems: A primer for decision makers. Journal of Democracy, 14(4), 115–127.
11. Karimova, N., & Deverell, E. (2001). Minorities in Turkey. Stockholm: The Swedish Institute of International Affairs. Retrieved from http://miris.eurac.edu/mugs2/do/blob.pdf?type=pdf&serial=1101210931437
12. Kaya, N., & Baldwin, C. (2004). Minorities in Turkey: Submission to the European Union and the government of Turkey. Minority Rights Group International Report, 5–36.
13. KONDA. (2014, April 16). 30 Mart yerel seçimler sonrası sandık ve seçmen analizi. Retrieved May 25, 2016, from http://konda.com.tr/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/KONDA_30Mart2014_YerelSecimAnalizi.pdf
14. Kübler, D. (2001). Understanding policy change with the advocacy coalition framework: an application to Swiss drug policy. Journal of European Public Policy, 8(4), 623–641.
15. Lausanne Peace Treaty. (n.d.). Retrieved March 15, 2015, from http://www.mfa.gov.tr/lausanne-peace-treaty-part-i_-political-clauses.en.mfa
16. Moroff, A. (2010). Party bans in Africa–an empirical overview. Democratization, 17(4), 618–641.
17. Norris, P. (2003). Electoral engineering: Voting rules and political behavior. New York: Cambridge university press. Retrieved from https://www.hks.harvard.edu/fs/pnorris/Acrobat/APSA2003%20Electoral%20Engineering.pdf
18. Nüfus. (n.d.). Retrieved March 26, 2015, from http://www.mardin.gov.tr/english/tarihi/nufus.asp
19. Pelizzo, R., & Stapenhurst, R. (2004). Tools for legislative oversight: An empirical investigation. Research Collection School of Social Sciences. Retrieved from http://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soss_research/44
20. Reilly, B. (2002). Democracy in divided societies: Electoral engineering for conflict management. Journal of Democracy, 13(2).
21. Sabatier, P. A. (1998). The advocacy coalition framework: revisions and relevance for Europe. Journal of European Public Policy, 5(1), 98–130.
22. Sabatier, P. A., & Jenkins-Smith, H. C. (1999). The advocacy coalition framework: an assessment. In P. A. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the policy process (pp. 117–166). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
23. Sartori, G. (2005). Parties and party systems: A framework for analysis. ECPR press.
24. Schedler, A. (2006). Electoral authoritarianism: The dynamics of unfree competition.
25. Schlager, E. (1995). Policy making and collective action: Defining coalitions within the advocacy coalition framework. Policy Sciences, 28(3), 243–270.
26. Siyasi Partiler Kanunu, 2820 § Azınlık yaratılmasının önlenmesi (1983). Retrieved from http://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/MevzuatMetin/1.5.2820.pdf
27. SKLI. (n.d.-a). Law on Metropolitan Municipalities. Retrieved April 27, 2016, from http://projects.sklinternational.se/tuselog/files/2013/07/Law5216_EN.pdf
28. SKLI. (n.d.-b). Law on Special Provincial Administration. Retrieved April 27, 2016, from http://projects.sklinternational.se/tuselog/files/2013/07/Law5302_EN.pdf
29. Türk, H. S. (1993). Electoral Systems and Turkish Experience. Ankara: Ankara Üniversitesi Basımevi. Retrieved from http://dergiler.ankara.edu.tr/dergiler/38/299/2803.pdf
30. Umit, R. (2015). The 2014 presidential election in Turkey. Electoral Studies, (39), 173–177.
31. Zollinger, D., & Bochsler, D. (2012). Minority representation in a semi-democratic regime: the Georgian case. Democratization, 19(4), 611–641.